Changing the 2nd Amendment

Seattle Post Intelligencer ^ | May 9, 2002 | Seattle Post Intelligencer Editorial Board

[borkrules]

We need a ruling!

Perhaps the Administration is waiting until they've had a chance to appoint a Supreme Court Justice or two.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

They are in the Algore "living constitution" camp.

[Joe Brower]

[newgeezer]

"Otherwise, the door will open wide to weakening the responsible gun laws that protect us all."

Wrong. "Gun laws" mainly protect gun-toting criminals from any fear of resistance.

[HELLRAISER II]

When all our people figure this out, it will be to late. If they want my guns they'll have to come take them by force.

[Ohioan]

The time is ripe, as is said in legal parlance, for the high court to weigh in again on the Second Amendment and, it can be hoped, reaffirm the position that the Constitution guarantees only a collective right to guns through state and federal militias, not an individual's absolute right. Otherwise, the door will open wide to weakening the responsible gun laws that protect us all.

The paper is either edited by dysrons or is engaging in the typical dishonest argument that has become the identifying characteristic of the Fabian Socialist claiming to be a "Liberal."

Anyone remotely familiar with the thinking of the Founding Fathers on this issue (see The Right To Keep & Bear Arms), knows that the decisions to which this writer refers were the contrived manipulations of the Constitution by activist Judges, who accepted the situational ethics that all Fabian Socialists and their allies embrace. There is absolutely no evidence that the 2nd Amendment was not intended to do what every patriot at the time wanted done, a clear enunciation of the sacred right of the individual American to arm himself for his own and his people's protection.

This is not debatable among people with intellectual integrity. It is debated by those who think that verbal gamesmanship is more important--or at least more useful to those who seek power--than sacred oaths.

What pathetic verbage!

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Agree. But to get that little job done we must first take the senate. Bye-bye Wellstone, Carnahan, et al.

[Hunble]

Could it be for the same reason they emphasis "the state shall not establish a religion" and then ignore the rest of the sentence, "nor prevent the free exercise thereof"? Could it be that the Constitution restricts their plans to change our form of government?

B I N G O

If they want to change the Constitution, then pass a new Amendment. The formal procedure is very well explained.

[keithtoo]

As they say "When they come for your guns give them the bullets first"

Preferrably at 2200mph, with rotation.

[borkrules]

As you've implied, the Second Amendment is the people's "ace in the hole", their last line of defense against despotism. It exists for the sole purpose of defending the republic against attempts to overthrow it, from either within or without.

It's not about duck hunting, or even primarily about home defense. Its about shooting usurpers.

Any other explanation for it's existence is tap dancing around an uncomfortable truth.

[Michael.SF.]

"We, the citizens of America are the militia and it is our duty to secure our free state."

That statement was certainly much more true in the days of the Spirit of '76.

As we all should recall, the Minute Men, were the Militia of the day and their need to have weapons at home was fundamental to the strategy of the Militia, which they were an integral part of.

Liberals do not recall history, they interpret it to fit their changing needs. Then they attach lables to it and call it things like "herstory."

[Constitutional Patriot]

Could it be that the Constitution restricts their plans to change our form of government? That is my bet.

You nailed it.

[wattsmag2]

What haven't activist judges trashed?

[ladtx]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Seems to me if this only applied to a militia that is where the wording would stop, as in "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the militia to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." But, being a thinking man, I would say the addition of "the right of the people" pertains to every citizen.

[Senator_Blutarski]

To paraphase: "The first victim of the liberal press is the truth".

[alaskanfan]

The time is ripe, as is said in legal parlance, for the high court to weigh in again on the First Amendment and, it can be hoped, reaffirm the position that the Constitution guarantees only a collective right to free speech through state and federal media, not an individual's absolute right. Otherwise, the door will open wide to weakening the responsible free speech laws that protect us all.

Just wondering how The Seattle Post-Intelligencer Editorial Board would feel if the last paragraph of their article read like the preceeding?

[Texas Mom]

I would love to send this person an altered copy of our Constitution where "people" is replaced with "National Guard."

Me too.. Isn't it strange the first National Guard Unit wasn't even formed until the early nineteen hundreds..

[Hunble]

Militia = "the people"

As I defend my family from a terrorist, it is my duty as a member of that Militia to use any available Lethal Force.

I will NOT call 9-11 to beg the police to protect my family when they are in danger. However, I will notify the police where they may gather up the body parts, if finally show up.

[HELLRAISER II]

They'll play hell taking the Good Ol'Boy's guns down here in the South, I can tell you that with confidence. It's hard to believe with all that's gone down in the last 8 months that our law makers want to take our guns, don't these idiots realize that we are the 1st line of defense against aggressors.

[goodnesswins]

Here's the letter I sent their editorial staff:

So, according to YOUR interpretation of the 2nd Amendment……

when a burglar or rapist or plunderer breaks down my

door, or my life is otherwise threatened, I’m supposed

to call the “state and federal militias?”

Yeah, right. Gee, wasn't it Hitler who confiscated all the

firearms first? Oh, but we peons just can't take

care of ourselves, can we?